Talk:Bæddel and bædling

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that bædlings may have been a third gender in Anglo-Saxon society?

• Source: Wade, Erik (2020). "The Beast with Two Backs: Bestiality, Sex Between Men, and Byzantine Theology in the Paenitentiale Theodori". Journal of Medieval Worlds. 2 (1–2). doi:10.1525/jmw.2020.2.1-2.11. page 23

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Fisheries in the Philippines (5th of 5 QPQs) Template:Did you know nominations/WZAZ

Created by Generalissima (talk). Number of QPQs required: 2. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 92 past nominations.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC).

• Nice work on this article, I'm surprised we didn't already have it. The page is long enough, new enough, and well-sourced. Both QPQs done. Hook interesting, short enough, and sourced. Exact wording in the article is "Clark notes that bædling might imply a third gender but suggests that there is not enough evidence for this". Good to go. Tenpop421 (talk) 14:26, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bæddel and bædling/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 04:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Tenpop421 (talk · contribs) 17:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Generalissima: I will be reviewing this article this week. Best, Tenpop421 (talk) 17:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment from an outsider. The article elides Bell's basic observations (p. 19) that bædlings could be children and sex between bædlings could be pederastic. Urve (talk) 19:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  • And, FWIW, the statement Bæddel and bædling are Old English terms referring to non-normative sexual or gender identities is an anachronism. Urve (talk) 20:11, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

    Oh, thank you for the comments! By anachronism, do you mean that I should say they were Old English terms? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

    No; I think present tense is fine. The problem is the idea that these terms describe 'sexual identities'. Bell, for instance, correctly understands these terms as descriptions of people based on activity, and does not describe them in terms of internal self-identification. By way of comparison, it is like saying the word 'sodomite' is a sexual identity because it's based on sexual behavior. That is an anachronism because, depending on one's view, sexual identity and orientation were not developed in Europe until the nineteenth century; prior to this, men having sex with men did not confer any identity. 'Sodomite' (like bædling) is not a sexual identity -- 'homosexual' may be but that progressed in a different historical manner. The prior description of these terms as "non-normative categories of sex or gender" is more correct, IMO. I have no view on describing them as 'gender identities' but it probably faces similar timing problems. Urve (talk) 21:13, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

    Oh that's a good point. I initially described them as categories, and I think I'll just put the phrasing back at that. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

    Apologies! That was a change I made prior to deciding to review the page. Tenpop421 (talk) 23:51, 3 December 2024

@Generalissima: this is good work. It's generally clear, neutral, and broad in its coverage. Images are probably not necessary (though images of the texts discussed could be added at some future stage). I have some qualms about the content and a small number of grammar/spelling issues. Tenpop421 (talk) 00:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

• Tenpop421 Thank you so much for the review! I think I got to everything. Generalissima (talk) (it/she)
  • @Generalissima: After one last read through, I think I'm happy to pass this. Tenpop421 (talk) 20:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Grammar, spelling, and flow

• although their precise meaning and scope is debated by scholars - is > are

• Bædling is thought to denote some sort of gender nonconformity, sexual passivity, and possibly a third gender - and > or

• The penitential Paenitentiale Theodori > The penitential handbook Paenitentiale Theodori

• tenatively > tentatively

• established enough to become a common nickname (in the form bade) by the thirteenth century. > established enough by the thirteenth century to become a common nickname (in the form bade).
  • Fixed all these! Ty. - G

Content

• Gender non-normative burials from the period have been used to support the potential of a third gender or gender nonconformity in Anglo-Saxon society. - this is not really supported in the body, which only tells us that gender nonconforming burials have been "associated" with the terms discussed. If Fulk 2004 does make this argument then it should say so in the body.
  • Made this agree with the body better. - G

• bædling is attested in four sources — in two glossaries and two penitentials — while bæddel is only attested from two glossaries - This enumeration needs to be attributed as other sources disagree. For example, the OED gives a late attestation of the word bædling in Middle Scots.
  • Ooh, good point. I turned this into a "small number of sources"; hopefully that isn't too vague, I don't wanna directly contradict either source. - G

• The Antwerp Glossary associates bæddel with the otherwise unattested word wæpenwifestre, seemingly denoting a wif (woman) with a phallus or phallic masculinity along the lines of the common term wæpnedman (male) - This sentence is not awfully clear. Can you expand on it (along the lines of Bell 2023) by giving an explanation that wæpned = "weaponed" (having a penis). Also if we do cite wæpnedman as an example, we probably should either explain that "man" is gender neutral, or give an explicit gloss of it as "weaponed person".
  • Glossed it. - G
• The derivation of bædling from bæddel may have developed from their ability to take either the passive or dominant role during sex, therefore having the sexual qualities of both a man and a woman. - This sentence isn't very clear either, but I don't have access to Frantzen 1998 so I can't make sense of it. Why would the addition of either suffix change it's meaning to this? And what does Frantzen think baeddel meant in the first place? If "intersex", then this is a peculiar surmise. It might be necessary to just remove this sentence, or move it to the Analysis section, as I'm not sure what it's doing here.
  • I removed it; if you wanna see if you can make more sense of Frantzen, I linked the book's internet archive page in the bibliography - G
    • Thank you! BTW, I've also removed Bædling may have been derived from bæddel due to them having both male and female qualities during sex, or both terms may have derived from another Old English adjective from the lede as it summarises this information and duplicates information otherwise in the lede. Tenpop421 (talk) 11:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

• The penitential Paenitentiale Theodori - mention that this is the Old English translation of the penitential handbook.
  • Done. - G

• Some scholars have associated the terms with gender non-normative burials from the Anglo-Saxon period, including male skeletons buried alongside female grave goods - I don't see this in Wade 2024, who does, however, talk about the two topics in close succession. Is this in Fulk 2004? If it is, the Wade citation should probably be removed.
  • Removed Wade. - G
    • @Generalissima: Sorry, I only got access to Fulk 2004 today. Since Fulk makes the observation, rather than attributing the observation to other scholars, could you change it to "Robert D. Fulk has associated the terms with" instead. Tenpop421 (talk) 17:22, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

  Tenpop421 Done! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:43, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

• Scholars such as J. R. C. Hall and Ferdinand Holthausen have posited an Old English term bædan also derived from the more common homonymous verb bædan 'to compel' - As I understand from the text and from Merritt, this word is well-attested, but only arguably attested with this meaning. Merritt argues that the hand behind this gloss misunderstood the Latin word coinquinaverunt as meaning "to compel", and therefore used the word bædan with its known meaning, rather than with an otherwise unattested one. Can we make this clearer in the text? The word "posit" should not be used as they don't posit a word, they argue that it had a certain meaning. They don't argue the word is "derived" from a homonymous verb, but that it is that verb.
  • Good catch - clarified. - G
• Badling, a modern English term for an effeminate man - There is no such modern English word and, so far as I can tell, neither source backs this claim up.
  • Fixed that, silly mistake on my part. - G

• is likely derived from bædling - Is it? Again, I can't see this claim in either source. The gap between an attestation of the Old English "bædling" and the English regional term "badling" is rather large. The OED is open to it either being derived from the Old English word or it being a later, independent derivation ("In later use apparently reanalysed as showing (or perhaps independently <) "bad" adj. and "‑ling" suffix.").
  • Ah, fair enough. Would saying 'possibly descended from bædling or bad' fit the OED's perspective then? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:48, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
    • I think "may descend from bædling, but could also be a later, independent derivation from bad + -ling" is a bit clearer. Tenpop421 (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

      Tenpop421 Good call! Made that fix too. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 17:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)